|
Post by colinchapmannz on Dec 29, 2019 4:35:22 GMT
As presented in the QS, movement and range are a bit muddled in focus. On one hand, vehicles have a looser, more narrative approach via Maneuver mods. On the other hand, creatures are presented with highly simulationist movement rates (normal and maximum) in very specific metres. On the third hand (mutation is a blessing!) PC movement isn't really mentioned at all. Similarly, specific ranges are noted for ranged weapons while the ruleset advocates primarily handwaving them as broad range bands. Given that very few people can accurately or quickly visualise specific ranges (or speeds), and highly precise movement rates are a bear to deal with, I wonder how it's actually being handled?
Personally, I prefer the looser, more narrative approach as used with vehicles, and can conceive of a couple of ways PC-level and animal-level movement can be easily handled mechanically without getting down to the specifics of individual metres.
cheers, Colin
|
|
|
Post by colinchapmannz on Jan 14, 2020 6:50:26 GMT
As an example, chases at character level (and for most animals) could be handled by opposed Coordination-related rolls, with certain natural abilities and biomods, etc. adjusting this. Greater success would represent extending (or closing) range bands.This could easily be based directly on the vehicle chase-elude rules.
For creatures able to keep pace with even slower vehicles, they would use the vehicle chase rules and modifiers.
Cheers, Colin
|
|
|
Post by colinchapmannz on Feb 8, 2020 6:40:06 GMT
Anyone have any insight to share?
|
|
|
Post by doublea on Feb 10, 2020 5:31:35 GMT
I suspect the new edition, at least in its current form, handles movement just like v1 and v2 did, where you can walk and take your action, or 'scramble' and take a -2 to your action. Combat scenes tend to be pretty close-ranged, very rarely do you have combat rounds where one character is, say, sniping at a far off enemy who is running to get to you, so most of the time in games I ran it was less bookkeeping and more me asking the question in my head 'Are they close enough to walk there, scramble there, or sprint there in around three seconds or so?' and I went from there. So let's think, we had Crawl/Scramble/Sprint for basic human movement, which represented 'normal' speed as well as a sort of max and minimum (or at least, slow as you could go and still be considered moving). I'm thinking the movement rates are not meant intentionally to be extremely precise as much as perhaps give an idea of how much faster / slower a given critter is to human base movement, and the 'normal / maximum' movement is considered movement-while-acting and then movement-all-out. Again, I personally would not view these as hard and fast numbers, more like a good reference to how -much- faster or slower than the PCs can move. I like your thought on the 'chase' mechanic being more like the vehicle movement rules. A good chase sequence should be fast-paced and exciting, so you don't want a ton of rolls slowing things down. Simple opposed rolls to change range bands sounds good if you have one character chasing down another. That said, if there was a combat encounter, and now I imagine a situation where the NPC is running and the PC is chasing, while firing guns at each other...well I don't know. On a similar vein the dogfighting rules in BPv2 felt to me to be a little complex. That said, it didn't come up in my games!
|
|
|
Post by colinchapmannz on Feb 10, 2020 7:06:15 GMT
Thanks. I think even if they're suggestions, specific rates are largely pointless unless you're tracking them or using battlemats. Not everyone runs equally well every time, so a few appropriate Coordination rolls (or Physique for long distance races/chases) would serve better to see if someone catches/escapes someone(thing) else. Way easier and more cinematic. Likewise for ranges; a few range bands, e.g. point blank (within arm's reach), close (across the street), short (down the street), medium (at the other end of the football pitch), etc. would work better than the specific numerical values it says to largely ignore anyway. Just state a given character can move one range band per round. Keep it simple and cinematic should be the mantra, imo.
|
|
|
Post by doublea on Feb 11, 2020 9:31:18 GMT
Man I had to give that some thought. So, in terms of say, a creature, how would we represent easily that a particular species is faster than an unmodified human if we're using a range band mechanic? Do we change numbers to say like, a Lesser White can move 1.5 'range bands' a round? Or just that it can move three bands in two rounds? Or is it that you feel the speed itself is entirely expressed through the high Coordination state that the creature would have, thus eliminating the need for further number crunching?
|
|
|
Post by neil on Feb 11, 2020 11:47:11 GMT
Opposed co-ordination tests sounds good for me. If creatures are very fast or slow, note it in the description and perhaps give a modifier to their chasing checks.
|
|
|
Post by colinchapmannz on Feb 12, 2020 6:22:51 GMT
I was thinking much along the same lines as what neil just said: use Coordination, with creatures that are notably faster or slower having a modifier to the Coordination rolls. It really keeps it simple that way. Movement Rules:Use simple range bands (also used to describe the effective ranges various weapons work at) to make visualisation easy. Characters move a band a round.
Chases and Races:Opposed Coordination rolls over X number of rounds (depending on distance to goal/distance between chaser and pursuer). Creatures that are notably Fast/Slow or characters that have modifications that boost running speed get a flat modifier to the Coordination rolls. That approach keeps things flexible and cinematic, stills gives range some meaning and impact, allows things to work simply within the existing rule framework, and completely removes the need to track (or present) specific ranges/distances/movement rates.
|
|
|
Post by doublea on Feb 15, 2020 19:40:00 GMT
Yeah, I like this. Makes it clean and cinematic. I wonder about using the Focus Attribute mechanic for creatures, so you could have a critter with something like 'Ambush Predator' or 'Sprinter' as a focus attribute on Coordination to express their particular movement attributes. Probably would tie it up nicely.
|
|
|
Post by colinchapmannz on Feb 16, 2020 1:39:51 GMT
That's actually a damn fine idea. I wonder if we can get a dev in here to comment?
|
|
|
Post by colinchapmannz on Mar 15, 2020 8:50:56 GMT
A quick bump four weeks later.
|
|
|
Post by colinchapmannz on Mar 31, 2020 7:11:04 GMT
I think the official answer to my original question in this thread will be the final deciding factor for me in whether to back BP:R or not.
I'm increasingly picky about my RPG purchases these days, I know exactly what does and doesn't work for me and my groups, and I never buy anything I won't actually run, so core elements I need to houserule make a purchase must less likely. I stopped being an "RPG collector" years ago or buying stuff "just because it seems neat/interesting". Being ruthless about my RPG purchasing has meant I can save money for my other hobbies and family holidays and keep my collection lean and focused.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 28, 2020 18:32:17 GMT
I was thinking much along the same lines as what neil just said: use Coordination, with creatures that are notably faster or slower having a modifier to the Coordination rolls. It really keeps it simple that way. Movement Rules:Use simple range bands (also used to describe the effective ranges various weapons work at) to make visualisation easy. Characters move a band a round. Chases and Races:Opposed Coordination rolls over X number of rounds (depending on distance to goal/distance between chaser and pursuer). Creatures that are notably Fast/Slow or characters that have modifications that boost running speed get a flat modifier to the Coordination rolls. That approach keeps things flexible and cinematic, stills gives range some meaning and impact, allows things to work simply within the existing rule framework, and completely removes the need to track (or present) specific ranges/distances/movement rates. Movement speed only ever really matters when opposed, so this is exactly the plan - use the Maneuvers mechanic as the core of such in-game interactions.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 28, 2020 18:32:52 GMT
Yeah, I like this. Makes it clean and cinematic. I wonder about using the Focus Attribute mechanic for creatures, so you could have a critter with something like 'Ambush Predator' or 'Sprinter' as a focus attribute on Coordination to express their particular movement attributes. Probably would tie it up nicely. This is a great idea - likely to steal it! J-
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 28, 2020 18:35:12 GMT
That's actually a damn fine idea. I wonder if we can get a dev in here to comment? Sorry - the "dev team" is just me, and life has been "busy" of late, so I have not been able to really keep up on social media as well as I'd like. J-
|
|